PDA

View Full Version : Woody Paige: The Cell is the Worst Park in the MLB


Thatguyoverthere
07-01-2009, 04:30 PM
I just came home from work and my brother had the TV on Around the Horn, and they were discussing Ozzie's hatred toward Wrigley. Paige started talking and said something along the lines of "Wrigley is a sanctuary and a beautiful place to watch a ball game. I have no idea where these comments come from considering Ozzie manages in the WORST ballpark in the majors." Tim Cowlishaw and J.A. Adande also chirped in about how great Wrigley is and how Ozzie is either just jealous or just messing with the Chicago Media because of that "dump" on the southside.

The Wrigley stuff is puke-worthy but expected, but where the hell did the comments about the Cell come from? Have these guys even seen the ballpark in the past few years? Sure, it was a very bland place when it opened, but it's much improved and a great place to spend an afternoon. And the way they were talking about the park they made it sound like it was a disgrace to baseball and far and away worse than any other stadium. Even at its worst, the Cell was still 10x better than the Metrodome. I usually don't get that angry when the Sox get disrespected on ESPN, but this one struck a nerve. The only other time I felt this way was when ESPN completely left the Sox out of their ALC preview before the '05 season.

doublem23
07-01-2009, 04:34 PM
Skip Bayless was run out of town before the renovations of the Cell were complete, so it's understandable all he remembers is the concrete bowl from the early 90's (which was admittedly pretty ugly).

Whatever, anyone who at this point takes Skip Bayless seriously needs a brain scan, too.

Craig Grebeck
07-01-2009, 04:36 PM
Skip Bayless was run out of town before the renovations of the Cell were complete, so it's understandable all he remembers is the concrete bowl from the early 90's (which was admittedly pretty ugly).

Whatever, anyone who at this point takes Skip Bayless seriously needs a brain scan, too.
...

WhiteSox5187
07-01-2009, 04:37 PM
Skip Bayless was run out of town before the renovations of the Cell were complete, so it's understandable all he remembers is the concrete bowl from the early 90's (which was admittedly pretty ugly).

Whatever, anyone who at this point takes Skip Bayless seriously needs a brain scan, too.

I think he's talking about Woody Paige, but really for them to know anything about the Cell would require they actually go to the games there and seeing how this show has a guy who hasn't been to a Sox game since the Terry Bevington era as one of its panel makes me suspect that the journalistic integrity displayed by these sports writers might not be of Damon Runyan like quality.

spawn
07-01-2009, 04:38 PM
ATH is the same program frequented by the Moron. Maybe he's rubbing off?

Frater Perdurabo
07-01-2009, 04:39 PM
I think he's talking about Woody Paige, but really for them to know anything about the Cell would require they actually go to the games there and seeing how this show has a guy who hasn't been to a Sox game since the Terry Bevington era as one of its panel makes me suspect that the journalistic integrity displayed by these sports writers might not be of Damon Runyan like quality.

The National Enquirer has more journalistic integrity than these clowns.

Frater Perdurabo
07-01-2009, 04:39 PM
Maybe he's rubbing off?

Disturbing

spawn
07-01-2009, 04:43 PM
Disturbing
Quite. I think it's easy for members of the media to criticize The Cell whuile glorifying Wrigley. They don't have to get reaady for the game in the visitors clubhouse, which is where I believe Ozzie is coming from when callnig the place a dump. I don't watch ATH anyway, so the opinions of those assclowns doesn't mean much to me. :shrug:

34rancher
07-01-2009, 04:44 PM
Well in all fairness, it is like me saying Woody has nothing to enhance the quality of my life. I have not seen him in the past 10 years offer anything that has made me go hmmm, let me think about that. So, does that mean he knows anything? Don't know, don't watch him. Maybe we should all chip in a dollar and send him a ticket to let him see.

Mr.1Dog
07-01-2009, 04:52 PM
Around The Horn is still on the air?:scratch:

The Immigrant
07-01-2009, 04:57 PM
Around The Horn is still on the air?:scratch:

Sane individuals watch Around the Horn? :scratch:

kittle42
07-01-2009, 04:57 PM
With all the new (and better) parks since New Comiskey was built, wouldn't you think, though, that the park, even as currently modeled, is in the bottom 1/3 of MLB parks? Certainly not the worst, but down there.

Frater Perdurabo
07-01-2009, 05:09 PM
With all the new (and better) parks since New Comiskey was built, wouldn't you think, though, that the park, even as currently modeled, is in the bottom 1/3 of MLB parks? Certainly not the worst, but down there.

Part of that equation is the extent to which you weight the location of a park in your ratings.

For example, to what extent does (or should) a crumbling and rat-infested park like Wrigley get "credit" for being in Lakeview, a neighborhood that 25 years ago was in decline? On the opposite end is Camden Yards. I was there last weekend. Fantastic ballpark. But it and the Ravens stadium (which is just a block away) are in a pretty sad neighborhood, next to a highway, surrounded by parking lots.

The Critic
07-01-2009, 05:11 PM
With all the new (and better) parks since New Comiskey was built, wouldn't you think, though, that the park, even as currently modeled, is in the bottom 1/3 of MLB parks? Certainly not the worst, but down there.

I haven't been to enough parks to rank USCF league-wide, but I think the post-renovation park is a really nice place to see a ballgame. I know I like it a LOT more than Wrigley Field or Miller Park, and it's on par with Progressive Field and Chase Field.

chaotic8512
07-01-2009, 05:12 PM
I've been to only one park other than The Cell (Tropicana), and from that alone, I know the idiots at ATH are talking out of their ass just to make a not-so-bold-by-the-media's-standards point. Tropicana is a complete eyesore in comparison. Other parks that come to mind, just from what I've seen on broadcasts, are the Twinkie Dome and Oakland Coliseum.

I'm not trying to say The Cell is anywhere near the top, but it's certainly nowhere near the worst. I see the comment as no more than being based on an outdated, pre-renovations image, made for shock value. What a surprise for ESPN.

Red Barchetta
07-01-2009, 05:25 PM
I never thought Comiskey II was ugly, but it did have a sterile, boring look to it. It wasn't until after the ISA and US Cellular completed the renovations that I think The Cell is now one of the better ballparks in the league.

I always said Comiskey II was like building a brand new house and then not having the money to decorate it. You are then stuck with a house with no landscaping, building primer and no furniture.

These "experts" who still want to dump on the Cell have no idea what they are talking about. I think most of them just can't understand that there are some baseball fans who see through the marketing hype surrounding Wrigley Field.

Some of my Cub-fans friends even mentioned to me how nice The Cell is compared to when the ballpark first opened.

Huisj
07-01-2009, 05:29 PM
I always said Comiskey II was like building a brand new house and then not having the money to decorate it. You are then stuck with a house with no landscaping, building primer and no furniture.



That's actually a really good way of putting it. Along those same lines, it can also take a new place some time to start feeling like home--it takes time for memories and history to develop at a new park, and those things can add to the atmosphere a lot. I think plenty of those things exist for the Cell now that didn't 10 years ago.

Railsplitter
07-01-2009, 05:30 PM
ATH is the same program frequented by the Moron. Maybe he's rubbing off?

No maybe about it. He IS rubbing off.

It's Dankerific
07-01-2009, 05:31 PM
Also, not just woody paige, every one of the media people agreed with him. Only the host, Reali, didn't say it was the worst but simply said that maybe Ozzie was razzing the Chicago Media.

Id like to know when any of these "journalists" had last been at the stadium.

I've been to a few different stadiums. USCF isn't the best, for sure. But its not the bottom and I'm not sure about the bottom third. probably the middle third but i need to see some more stadiums first. Personally, I dont get the love for Dodger Stadium.

johnnyg83
07-01-2009, 05:46 PM
I've been to Metrodome, County, Fenway, Dodger, PacBell, Wrigley, Cell, Kauffman, PetCo ...

I'd rank the Cell 3rd or 4th of those nine.

LITTLE NELL
07-01-2009, 05:46 PM
I guess this Paige guy has never been to The Trop, Dolphin Stadium, Oakland Coliseum, Rogers Centre and the Dumpdome.

doublem23
07-01-2009, 05:47 PM
I think he's talking about Woody Paige, but really for them to know anything about the Cell would require they actually go to the games there and seeing how this show has a guy who hasn't been to a Sox game since the Terry Bevington era as one of its panel makes me suspect that the journalistic integrity displayed by these sports writers might not be of Damon Runyan like quality.

:redface:

I wonder if Woody Paige has ever stepped foot in the Cell.

samurai_sox
07-01-2009, 06:02 PM
You just made me hate that show a million times more than I already do. :redneck

skobabe8
07-01-2009, 06:09 PM
:redface:

I wonder if Woody Paige has ever stepped foot in the Cell.

I highly doubt it. MAYBE for the All-Star Game.

michned
07-01-2009, 06:18 PM
I see the comment as no more than being based on an outdated, pre-renovations image...

This happens a lot with the national media. Billy Ripken commented on how he doesn't like USCF on satellite radio last week. I have a nephew-in-law that came to Chicago for business and talked about how he heard the Cell is "not good." I think a lot of this stuff is just regurgitated from what was said in the pre-renovation days.

IlliniSox4Life
07-01-2009, 06:36 PM
I've been to about 11 or 12 parks.

Ranking them is all about what you personally consider to be important in a park. Parking, Sight Lines, Atmosphere, Ease of Access, Uniqueness, Cleanliness etc are all things that people like to different degrees. Of the dozen or so parks I've been to, the Cell hasn't been last in ANY of the possible categories you could use to rate parks, let alone averaging last.

For example, the sight lines in Wrigley are far worse than the sight lines at US Cellular, as well as the parking being worse at Wrigley. I doubt that many Cubs fans would even argue that. Some (most) would say that they don't care, and they still like Wrigley better. As long as they are willing to admit certain fairly obvious comparisons like that, I have no problem with that.

The thing that really makes me think the people at ATH are idiots, is that they don't get where Ozzie was coming from. Ozzie is a manager. 99% of what goes into his ratings for ball parks is the clubhouses and facilities. You can ask anybody on any team in baseball which stadium has the worse facilities and the worst clubhouse, and if Wrigley isn't #1, it's in the top 2 or 3. That is all Ozzie was really saying (granted he said it in a way which was to intentionally poke at the media and Cubs fans).

MarySwiss
07-01-2009, 06:38 PM
This happens a lot with the national media. Billy Ripken commented on how he doesn't like USCF on satellite radio last week. I have a nephew-in-law that came to Chicago for business and talked about how he heard the Cell is "not good." I think a lot of this stuff is just regurgitated from what was said in the pre-renovation days.
I suspect you're right, michned. I admit, I've only been to Wrigley, Chase Field, and the Cell. Wrigley--faggidaboudit, I like Chase, but I think the Cell is wonderful--a vibrant and exciting ballpark and a great place to watch a game.

And those guys on ATH are beneath contempt, BTW.

Edit: great sig!

cws05champ
07-01-2009, 08:37 PM
Since when do facts get in the way of any opinions spewed on ESPN. I don't watch ESPN much anymore but it does bother me when myths like this get perpetuated. It is all the viewers have to go on and things get a bad rap for no reason but ignorance.

In addition to the Cell, I have been to Wrigley, Busch(new and old), PacBell/ATT, Chase/BOB, Fenway, Miller Park, County Stadium, Old Yankee, Camden Yards, Trop, Dolphins Stadium. I may be biased but The Cell is better than all except Pacbell, new Busch, Camden yards.

The thing with Wrigley is when people talk about it...they can't quantify what they like about it. Bad layout, bad site lines, bad amenities, smells bad, cramped and is falling apart. But when people talk about it is all "Magic", "puppy dogs" and "rainbows".

russ99
07-01-2009, 08:59 PM
I've been to Metrodome, County, Fenway, Dodger, PacBell, Wrigley, Cell, Kauffman, PetCo ...

I'd rank the Cell 3rd or 4th of those nine.

That's around my rank too, and I've been to Busch (old and new), County (now that was a nice old park), Miller, Wrigley, Metrodome, Tigers, Kaufmann, Candlestick and PacBell along with the Cell and Comiskey.

But old Comiskey would be #1.

Besides, you can't just dump the Cell into the bottom when ranking it with the parks made after it. I'd go as far as saying it's in the upper middle range of the newer ones too. Certainly better than Miller or New Busch, not to mention those new ones in NYC.

And from personal experience, I took one of my friends to her first baseball game at the Cell (though she's slightly Cub-oriented, most likely due to media brainwashing) recently and she had an absolute blast and was raving about how nice the park is.

Boondock Saint
07-01-2009, 08:59 PM
Woody Paige

That's where you lost me.

JohnnyInnsbrook
07-01-2009, 08:59 PM
I don't watch ESPN much anymore but it does bother me when myths like this get perpetuated. It is all the viewers have to go on and things get a bad rap for no reason but ignorance.


I agree and I understand the whole, "Under the radar" philosophy, but there comes a point where the Sox need to come out and start busting some of these myths and rumors in a classy way. Call this "journalist"(blogger) out in a newspaper and invite this to a game, then see what he has to say. IMO the sox can not and should not sit back and let people take cheap shots at them.

beasly213
07-01-2009, 09:07 PM
:whocares


Woody is a jackass.

rdivaldi
07-01-2009, 09:10 PM
I usually don't get that angry when the Sox get disrespected on ESPN

People still watch ESPN? With CSN, MLB Network & NFL Network i doesn't even register on my radar.

drewcifer
07-01-2009, 09:14 PM
People still watch ESPN? With CSN, MLB Network & NFL Network i doesn't even register on my radar.

I was going to say the same thing. Since MLB network got thrown into my package on Comcast, I haven't even stopped in on ESPN other than for a look in on the Sunday night game a few times.

october23sp
07-01-2009, 09:19 PM
I'll accidently catch some Around the Horn when I want to catch Pardon the Interruption.

I'm not sure if I even like PTI but I do think it's hilarious how they call people "Their Boy" "Your boy" "My Boy".

**** ESPN, MLB Network is top notch.

johnnyg83
07-01-2009, 09:22 PM
I was going to say the same thing. Since MLB network got thrown into my package on Comcast, I haven't even stopped in on ESPN other than for a look in on the Sunday night game a few times.

It is unbelievable to me. I used to cringe thru BBTN, but watch it every night as it was the only source for Sox highlights in KC. Then came MLB.com, then MLB.Tv ... now I glance at ESPN during the MLB.TV commercials and that's it. They're awful.

Breaking in to Manny Ramirez minor league ABs and putting that on the crawl as breaking news is embarrassing.

Viva Medias B's
07-01-2009, 09:24 PM
:ozzie
Those guys don't like our ballpark? [Bleep] them!

asindc
07-01-2009, 11:19 PM
:whocares


Woody is a jackass.

It matters because there is a chance that fewer casual baseball fans visiting Chicago will attend a game at Comiskey II if this kind of junk keeps getting spewed by national media. I care about that because more people attending Sox games means more money for the organization to work with in trying to build a perennial contender and championship team. If it did not potentially affect the bottom line, I might share your sentiment. But it does have that potential. That's why some of us care.

jabrch
07-01-2009, 11:21 PM
I just wonder if people like this have ever come to games as fans...tailgated...sat in regular seats, paid for them...sat in the UD...sat in the OF....


I'm guessing very few.

rdivaldi
07-01-2009, 11:23 PM
It matters because there is a chance that fewer casual baseball fans visiting Chicago will attend a game at Comiskey II if this kind of junk keeps getting spewed by national media. I care about that because the more people attending Sox games means more money for the organization to work with in trying to build a perennial contender and championship team. If it did not potentially affect the bottom line, I might share your sentiment. But it does have that potential. That's why some of us care.

I agree with this whole-heartedly. As much as I wish all people would think on their own and make their own opinions, it's just not true. A large portion of the population are lemmings, following the talking heads wherever they lead them. If dopes like Woody Paige say the same lie over and over again, some people will treat it like a fact.

JB98
07-01-2009, 11:55 PM
I agree with this whole-heartedly. As much as I wish all people would think on their own and make their own opinions, it's just not true. A large portion of the population are lemmings, following the talking heads wherever they lead them. If dopes like Woody Paige say the same lie over and over again, some people will treat it like a fact.

For that same reason, A.J. Pierzynski is booed in every park in America (besides the Cell).

"ESPN says he's a jerk! It must be so! Let's boo him!"

waldo_the_wolf
07-02-2009, 02:54 AM
The thing with Wrigley is when people talk about it...they can't quantify what they like about it. Bad layout, bad site lines, bad amenities, smells bad, cramped and is falling apart. But when people talk about it is all "Magic", "puppy dogs" and "rainbows".

Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! You hit the nail on the head there my friend. I know one arrogant Cubs fan who says Wrigley is fantastic but the only real reason I recall hearing him give is its lack of a jumbotron, how that's "baseball as it should be".

spawn
07-02-2009, 07:15 AM
Me and my neighbor behind me were talking the other day. He knows I'm a Sox fan, while he always told me he liked both teams. He told me he and his family have now become more invested in the Sox than the Cubs. The reason? The Cell. He said they had the opportunity to go to a few more Sox games last year, and they had a really good time each time they went. He said there is more of a family atmosphere at the Cell than at Wrigley. He didn't put Wrigley Field down, and said he still enjoys going there as well, but there was much more to do with his family at The Cell than Wrigley.

Marqhead
07-02-2009, 07:28 AM
People still watch ESPN? With CSN, MLB Network & NFL Network i doesn't even register on my radar.

Unfortunately, my cable provider has zero of these options in their service packages. This forces me to watch ESPN as my regular source for baseball highlights.

I used to be a supporter of BBTN, and as late as the beginning of this season I was defending it, but man it has taken a huge turn for the worse the last couple years and is becoming more unwatchable with each passing episode. I pray for the day when I can get DirecTV and say to hell with ESPN.

beasly213
07-02-2009, 08:47 AM
It matters because there is a chance that fewer casual baseball fans visiting Chicago will attend a game at Comiskey II if this kind of junk keeps getting spewed by national media. I care about that because more people attending Sox games means more money for the organization to work with in trying to build a perennial contender and championship team. If it did not potentially affect the bottom line, I might share your sentiment. But it does have that potential. That's why some of us care.

I don't care because there is nothing you can do about ESPN and the national media making Wrigley out to be a shrine and US Cellular out to be a dump. No matter how many improvments are made to the park in the national medias eyes it will always be no where near as great as Wrigley.

You can't change what ESPN says so why get worked up about it? Besides anyone that is going to base what ballparks they visit and which ones they don't on what Woody Paige says needs to have their head examined. He is the biggest joke besides Skip Balyes on that Network, and that is saying something.

Heffalump
07-02-2009, 08:59 AM
Who cares? In my opinion, let them say whatever they want. It just means less idiots and "social" fans coming to the Cell - Which means a better experience for me and my family. I don't need the Cell to turn into Wrigley.

As long as the White Sox win, their fan base and their national media "reputation" - whatever that is - will be just fine.

Now back to business - kicking some KC ass!

Luke
07-02-2009, 09:02 AM
In the last week chuckle heads at Bristol have said that the Sox need new uniforms and have the worst park in baseball.

They're on about the same level as Perez Hilton right now.

asindc
07-02-2009, 09:03 AM
I don't care because there is nothing you can do about ESPN and the national media making Wrigley out to be a shrine and US Cellular out to be a dump. No matter how many improvments are made to the park in the national medias eyes it will always be no where near as great as Wrigley.

You can't change what ESPN says so why get worked up about it? Besides anyone that is going to base what ballparks they visit and which ones they don't on what Woody Paige says needs to have their head examined. He is the biggest joke besides Skip Balyes on that Network, and that is saying something.

There is a difference between caring about it enough to want to see the organization counter it with an effective PR campaign (which benefits the bottom line, the only thing that matters here) and getting "worked up about it."

Iwritecode
07-02-2009, 09:18 AM
Who the hell is Woody Paige? :dunno:

g0g0
07-02-2009, 09:48 AM
The ballpark has more character now and isn't so bland as it was when it opened. How could a dump be used in so many movies?? Yes it doesn't have the history of Fenway or Wrigley, but I think that's a GOOD thing. One day those parks will come down due to age. It'll be interesting to see them try to recreate the atmosphere. (Which will be impossible compared to the old.)

Red Barchetta
07-02-2009, 09:59 AM
Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! You hit the nail on the head there my friend. I know one arrogant Cubs fan who says Wrigley is fantastic but the only real reason I recall hearing him give is its lack of a jumbotron, how that's "baseball as it should be".

Your friend is correct! What baseball field is complete without the big Under Armour logos on the outfield wall?!

I love how the old stereotypes of Wrigley are slowly fading away. Lights for night games, on field advertising, etc. I love the family-friendly "Horseshoe Casino" sponsorship on the LCF Rooftop. Replacing the other family-friendly "Budweiser" sponsorship. :tongue:

I laugh at all these ballpark rankings because they try to compare stuff that is difficult to compare. If The Cell would have opened as it appears today and if it was in a city that did not have to compete with one of the two oldest remaining baseball "shrines" :rolleyes:, the perception would be completely different. The fact that the largest media conglomerate also owned the formentioned "shrine" and well, you get the picture....

Hitmen77
07-02-2009, 10:04 AM
Skip Bayless was run out of town before the renovations of the Cell were complete, so it's understandable all he remembers is the concrete bowl from the early 90's (which was admittedly pretty ugly).

Whatever, anyone who at this point takes Skip Bayless seriously needs a brain scan, too.

It isn't just that Bayless left town before the renovations. When he was in Chicago he was a big-time Sox HATER. While the Sox cruised to a 95 win division title in 2000, he merciless ripped them day after day in the Trib.

I doubt him seeing the renovated park would make a difference. He's not an objective sports reporter, he's just another Marriotti.

TomParrish79
07-02-2009, 10:12 AM
Woody as entertaining as he was when this show first started, has hit the mode where he is out of usefull things to say. Why he is pandering to Cub fans on this subject I have no idea.

C-Dawg
07-02-2009, 10:41 AM
I've said it before, but here it is again.

The Cell will one day be praised for its clean, symmetrical, uncluttered design and great sight lines. Remember, Royals Stadium is of a similar design and for many years was heralded as among the best in baseball. The Cell does it one better by not being of a dated-looking 70s design.

I do wish they'd made the 100-level concourse at street level instead of up a couple stories, but we can't change that now. Inside the park it doesn't matter anyway.

The current "retro" parks are the new cookie cutter; once you've seen one, you've seen them all.

LITTLE NELL
07-02-2009, 10:56 AM
I've said it before, but here it is again.



The current "retro" parks are the new cookie cutter; once you've seen one, you've seen them all.
I agree, they are sort of phony in the respect that they are not being built to fit in a city neighborhood much like Fenway and many of the old parks that are no longer with us. They are just quirky designs built for the most part in the middle of parking lots.

AZChiSoxFan
07-02-2009, 10:57 AM
I haven't been to enough parks to rank USCF league-wide, but I think the post-renovation park is a really nice place to see a ballgame. I know I like it a LOT more than Wrigley Field or Miller Park, and it's on par with Progressive Field and Chase Field.

On par with Chase Field????? Dude, I have to vehemently disagree. IMO, USCF is light years ahead of Chase Field. Watching a game at Chase Field is like watching a game in an airplane hanger. I live in Phx and I attend MAYBE one game a year there. That place is in the bottom third in my opinion.

TDog
07-02-2009, 12:04 PM
I don't know who Woody Paige is. I certainly don't know enough about him to call him a lousy excuse for a human being for dissing the Cell. I don't know what Around the Horn is. I'm not going to label as morons people who watch it.

But I hear people in Northern California talking all the time about what a great park Wrigley Field is. It helps, I suppose, that Mike Krukow is one of the Giants announcers. Some people who say great things about Wrigley Field are writers and radio personalities who have been there. If some of them have been to the Cell, they might be upset that the press doesn't sit behind home plate anymore. Holding grudges like that would be petty, though.

Most of the major league stadiums I have been to no longer exist. But I went to a few games at Wrigley when I was a kid and was unimpressed. I don't know how much better it could be now that they apparently run electricity to the place. I've been to Miller Park, AT&T and whatever they're calling the thing in Oakland now.

Anyone who rates Wrigley ahead of AT&T loses credibility. You get more sitting in a kayak in McCovey Cove and listening to Jon Miller on the radio than you do sitting on a rooftop across the street from Wrigley, where you are probably drinking heavily and dissing on the steepness and remoteness of upper deck seats in the Cell.

The Cell is a better place to watch a game than Wrigley Field. The Cell is a better place to watch a game than Miller Park, unless it's raining (assuming the people have fixed the leaking roof since I lived there). Everything is relative, though. With the roof closed, Miller Park is a much worse place to watch a game than it is when it is open, and when it is open, it is not as good a place to watch a game as the Cell.
Rating the Cell below the home of the A's would seemingly destroy ones credibility.

Again, I don't know who Woody Paige is. I'm sure he doesn't know who I am. But I would seriously question his credibility on any issue if he is saying such things on television. I should find out what he looks like so that if I ever run into him while I am lost, I don't ask him for directions.

C-Dawg
07-02-2009, 12:34 PM
With the roof closed, Miller Park is a much worse place to watch a game than it is when it is open, and when it is open, it is not as good a place to watch a game as the Cell.


Definately! Miller Park is creepy with the roof closed.

spawn
07-02-2009, 12:35 PM
I don't know who Woody Paige is. I certainly don't know enough about him to call him a lousy excuse for a human being for dissing the Cell. I don't know what Around the Horn is. I'm not going to label as morons people who watch it.

But I hear people in Northern California talking all the time about what a great park Wrigley Field is. It helps, I suppose, that Mike Krukow is one of the Giants announcers. Some people who say great things about Wrigley Field are writers and radio personalities who have been there. If some of them have been to the Cell, they might be upset that the press doesn't sit behind home plate anymore. Holding grudges like that would be petty, though.

Most of the major league stadiums I have been to no longer exist. But I went to a few games at Wrigley when I was a kid and was unimpressed. I don't know how much better it could be now that they apparently run electricity to the place. I've been to Miller Park, AT&T and whatever they're calling the thing in Oakland now.

Anyone who rates Wrigley ahead of AT&T loses credibility. You get more sitting in a kayak in McCovey Cove and listening to Jon Miller on the radio than you do sitting on a rooftop across the street from Wrigley, where you are probably drinking heavily and dissing on the steepness and remoteness of upper deck seats in the Cell.

The Cell is a better place to watch a game than Wrigley Field. The Cell is a better place to watch a game than Miller Park, unless it's raining (assuming the people have fixed the leaking roof since I lived there). Everything is relative, though. With the roof closed, Miller Park is a much worse place to watch a game than it is when it is open, and when it is open, it is not as good a place to watch a game as the Cell.
Rating the Cell below the home of the A's would seemingly destroy ones credibility.

Again, I don't know who Woody Paige is. I'm sure he doesn't know who I am. But I would seriously question his credibility on any issue if he is saying such things on television. I should find out what he looks like so that if I ever run into him while I am lost, I don't ask him for directions.
http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/football/bob_blog/paige.jpg

Here he is in all of his glory.

PatK
07-02-2009, 02:02 PM
I'm sure like most people that rip The Cell, Woody has never been there, and only has heard about if from people that were last there 10 years ago.

guillensdisciple
07-02-2009, 04:19 PM
The White Sox will forever be in a battle with the media, because of our manager and overall management position on how we run things (you are either with us or against us). They will not recognize us until we win again, and when we do. Woody Paige will shut up.

The White Sox are Chicago baseball- plain and simple.

tstrike2000
07-02-2009, 05:14 PM
Calling our park the worst in baseball to me is like saying Sosa or Bonds didn't do PED's.

rdivaldi
07-02-2009, 09:20 PM
On par with Chase Field????? Dude, I have to vehemently disagree. IMO, USCF is light years ahead of Chase Field. Watching a game at Chase Field is like watching a game in an airplane hanger. I live in Phx and I attend MAYBE one game a year there. That place is in the bottom third in my opinion.

Agreed. I've been to that ballpark as well, it's awful with awful fans to boot.

The Critic
07-02-2009, 09:32 PM
On par with Chase Field????? Dude, I have to vehemently disagree. IMO, USCF is light years ahead of Chase Field. Watching a game at Chase Field is like watching a game in an airplane hanger. I live in Phx and I attend MAYBE one game a year there. That place is in the bottom third in my opinion.

I don't know, maybe I was just in a good mood.
:D:
I really enjoyed the park.
I had decent seats, I liked walking around the place, and I wasn't emotionally invested in who won or lost (the D-backs played the Brewers).

chisoxfanatic
07-02-2009, 09:34 PM
How much do you have to pay to use the pool in the BOB?

veeter
07-02-2009, 09:45 PM
Who the hell is Woody Paige? :dunno:I think he LOVES blow-up dolls.

tony1972
07-02-2009, 10:07 PM
How much do you have to pay to use the pool in the BOB?

$40 to use it...$50 if you want to pee in it..

Shoeless_Jeff
07-02-2009, 10:17 PM
%*&@ Woody Paige.

I have a friend from college that is from down state and recently moved to the Chicago area. We've been to a couple Sox games and he really likes The Cell. Before having gone, he was under the impression that it was "a dump" like everyone else. He also added that it was a lot nicer than it looked on TV and has zero interest in going to a game at Wrigley.

guillen4life13
07-03-2009, 05:23 AM
I actually emailed Woody regarding this, and he responded (which, to me, makes him respectable enough).

EDIT: I forgot to include the initial email I sent to him.

Here's the exchange.

From: gardenofsound
Sent: Thu 7/2/2009 3:05 AM
To: Paige, Woody
Subject: Your Criticism of U.S. Cellular Field and Ozzie Guillen

Woody,

I don't know if you actually read your emails, but I want to just
offer you a counter-argument to what you had to say about the Cell and
Ozzie's criticism of Wrigley Field.

When Ozzie criticizes Wrigley, he does so from the perspective of a
player and manager. He claims (and many other players/personnel in
the MLB agree) that the clubhouse and amenities offered to visiting
teams are horrible compared to other parks league wide. And as a
Chicagoan (and of course, a Sox fan) I do agree with his assessment of
Cubs fans, though of course, as with any team, there are knowledgeable
fans out there who attend games to watch the game. The honest truth
is that in Chicago's dichotomy, the people who attend Cubs games are
the ones with highly disposable incomes who go to see and be seen.
Sox fans are more blue-collar, more diverse, and go to less games per
year because the money simply isn't there. There's no glamor in going
to a Sox game or being a Sox fan. Once upon a time, there was, but
that's before the Tribune Co bought the Cubs and created a marketing
giant.

Now, as for the Cell, which you call the worst park in the MLB: have
you been there since the most recent renovations? The follow up:
have you been to any of the following parks?

The Metrodome (Twins)
Tropicana Field (Rays)
Skydome (Jays)
Dolphins Stadium (Marlins... and for baseball, not football)

Can you honestly say that these parks are better than the Cell? Next
question: what do you look for in a ballpark? History, obstructed
views be damned? Then Wrigley is the place to be. Just like old
Comiskey was the place to be. Or is it the neighborhood? Was Wrigley
so nice 25 years ago when its neighborhood was in decline and shoddy,
with a virtually nonexistent yuppy/bar scene? Wrigley Field, whether
people are willing to acknowledge it or not, is starting to fall apart
and it's time for the Cubs (NOT Chicago... the city has enough
budgetary problems as is right now) to realize it and either renovate
the stadium to bring it into the 20th, let alone 21st century.

I also strongly suggest you take another visit to the Cell. Sit
anywhere and experience great sightlines, great food, and a great
organ player (where else do you still have that?). If you go without
a predetermined bias, I believe you will change your mind.

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 5:02 PM, Paige, Woody <WPaige@denverpost.com> wrote:
I actually read emails. I actually, unlike others, respond to them. I said, which you must have missed, that he probably complains about the visiting lockerroom, which, as I said, I've been in and would agree with. The Cell reminds me of one. I've been there from when it was being built, as a mistake, to last year. I've been in every ballpark, football stadium, basketball arena. I think I'm as qualified as you or Ozzie. I happen to like Dolphins Stadium. It has a funky feel. The Metrodome stinks, and Trop sux. But your stadium is out of a long-gone era, despite the (welcome) changes. And the others you mentioned do have great locker rooms. I'm sorry you missed some of what I said. Thank you. Woody Paige

Woody,

Thank you for responding. I acknowledge my biased opinion, and while we may disagree (and I have seen games at Dolphins' Stadium, as I am a UMiami student and my NL team is the Marlins), I appreciate that you take the time to respond to emails. I know he is your colleague, but I am slightly jaded against ATH due to Jay Mariotti and his often unfair criticism of my favorite sports team. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I am especially respectful that you are willing to defend yours against criticism from people like me. I don't try to dismiss your qualifications, however I've been to a few ballparks and I do believe the Cell to be a very good place to watch a game, and as a Sox fan, I'm sick of what I believe to be unfair criticism of the ballpark that turns people away from even giving it a chance. It's no PNC or Camden Yards, but it's a nice place to watch a game.

Again, thank you for doing me the honor (no sarcasm implied or intended) of responding. That makes you more respectable than every other journalist I've ever written to.

-gardenofsound

SOXSINCE'70
07-03-2009, 07:58 AM
I think he LOVES blow-up dolls.

I thought he was a blow up doll.:D: One could say that he is full of hot air,much like a blow up doll.

asindc
07-03-2009, 08:43 AM
I actually emailed Woody regarding this, and he responded (which, to me, makes him respectable enough).

Here's the exchange.

From: gardenofsound
Sent: Thu 7/2/2009 3:05 AM
To: Paige, Woody
Subject: Your Criticism of U.S. Cellular Field and Ozzie Guillen


Woody,

Thank you for responding. I acknowledge my biased opinion, and while we may disagree (and I have seen games at Dolphins' Stadium, as I am a UMiami student and my NL team is the Marlins), I appreciate that you take the time to respond to emails. I know he is your colleague, but I am slightly jaded against ATH due to Jay Mariotti and his often unfair criticism of my favorite sports team. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I am especially respectful that you are willing to defend yours against criticism from people like me. I don't try to dismiss your qualifications, however I've been to a few ballparks and I do believe the Cell to be a very good place to watch a game, and as a Sox fan, I'm sick of what I believe to be unfair criticism of the ballpark that turns people away from even giving it a chance. It's no PNC or Camden Yards, but it's a nice place to watch a game.

Again, thank you for doing me the honor (no sarcasm implied or intended) of responding. That makes you more respectable than every other journalist I've ever written to.

-gardenofsound

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 5:02 PM, Paige, Woody <WPaige@denverpost.com> wrote:
I actually read emails. I actually, unlike others, respond to them. I said, which you must have missed, that he probably complains about the visiting lockerroom, which, as I said, I've been in and would agree with. The Cell reminds me of one. I've been there from when it was being built, as a mistake, to last year. I've been in every ballpark, football stadium, basketball arena. I think I'm as qualified as you or Ozzie. I happen to like Dolphins Stadium. It has a funky feel. The Metrodome stinks, and Trop sux. But your stadium is out of a long-gone era, despite the (welcome) changes. And the others you mentioned do have great locker rooms. I'm sorry you missed some of what I said. Thank you. Woody Paige


Very good exchange.

TDog
07-03-2009, 11:04 AM
Very good exchange.

Why is the Cell being something out a "a long-gone era" era a reason to grade it below Wrigley Field?

TomBradley72
07-03-2009, 12:34 PM
With all the new (and better) parks since New Comiskey was built, wouldn't you think, though, that the park, even as currently modeled, is in the bottom 1/3 of MLB parks? Certainly not the worst, but down there.

Fair point. I would put it ahead of: Metrodome, Marlins Stadium, Skydome, Royals Stadium, Tampa bay...but that's about it.

LITTLE NELL
07-03-2009, 02:29 PM
Fair point. I would put it ahead of: Metrodome, Marlins Stadium, Skydome, Royals Stadium, Tampa bay...but that's about it.
How about the disaster they call a stadium in Oakland.

TDog
07-03-2009, 02:54 PM
With all the new (and better) parks since New Comiskey was built, wouldn't you think, though, that the park, even as currently modeled, is in the bottom 1/3 of MLB parks? Certainly not the worst, but down there.

The newer parks aren't necessarily better. When Miller Park opened, some in the greater Milwaukee media (of which I was a member, but never wrote a word about the park or the Brewers and always payed my way in) complained about the sightlines. That is, in much of the park it isn't a very good place to watch a game. Media members often don't care about such things, but there were a surprising number of such complaints.

I've been to a lot of games in both Miller Park and Chase (when it was the BOB). I like Chase. I don't like Miller Park. Chase is much more bearable with the roof closed than Miller Park is. People used to, maybe still do, complain that the Cell was too much like a mall. Out of the seating areas at Miller Park, you are totally removed from the game, except for the television monitors. Yet, no one compares it to a mall. Find your seats and County Stadium was a better place to watch a game, unless you were behind a post or the weather was nasty.

If you have seats between the dugout and home plate, even the stadium in Oakland (the last time I was by it, McAfee had removed its name from it) can be a good place to watch a baseball game. If you're not watching the game, you have to look at Mount Davis instead of the Bay Bridge and McCovey Cove (if you're in the upper deck at AT&T) or people sitting on rooftops, but I go to watch the game. Not that AT&T isn't a great place to watch a baseball game, but ivy-covered walls elsewhere don't make my seats any better.

No stadium, no matter when it was built, that I have ever been to has better lower-deck seating than the lower bowl at the Cell provides. Some stadiums match it. Wrigley Field and Miller Park certainly don't for people who aren't sitting among the first few rows. And when I walk into the Cell, I smell a great restaurant. Sometimes I'll go to restaurants and be reminded of White Sox baseball.

One of the problems with media members commenting on stadium is that with a few exceptions, they don't sit with regular fans. Does it look cool on television? Can I see the city skyline from the press box? Do they let the reporters sit behind home plate?

I have higher standards.

C-Dawg
07-03-2009, 03:17 PM
blah blah blah...

So regardless of where the rest of us rate the Cell, Woody really DOES rate the Metrodome higher? I wonder on which points the Cell comes in second. I can't think of anything about the Metrodome that would swing it except possibly because its not subject to rainouts. But in July in Minneapolis, you'd have to shoot me and drag me inside that place before I'd sit in there.

Lip Man 1
07-03-2009, 04:11 PM
The print edition on The Sporting News just arrived and they rate the parks too.

U.S. Cellular is ranked 24th out of 30 ahead of Cincinnati, Toronto, Oakland, Miami (new stadium), Minnesota and Tampa Bay.

The one thing they love about the park is the scoreboard.

Boston is ranked #1, Pittsburgh #2, Wrigley Field #3, Baltimore #4, San Francisco #5.

Lip

TommyJohn
07-03-2009, 06:07 PM
The print edition on The Sporting News just arrived and they rate the parks too.

U.S. Cellular is ranked 24th out of 30 ahead of Cincinnati, Toronto, Oakland, Miami (new stadium), Minnesota and Tampa Bay.

The one thing they love about the park is the scoreboard.

Boston is ranked #1, Pittsburgh #2, Wrigley Field #3, Baltimore #4, San Francisco #5.

Lip

Boston is number 1? I'm shocked. Shocked I tell you.

MeteorsSox4367
07-03-2009, 06:40 PM
Boston is number 1? I'm shocked. Shocked I tell you.

Yep. I'm surprised Yankee Stadium and Citi Field aren't Nos. 1A and 1B just because they're in New York.

asindc
07-03-2009, 07:05 PM
Why is the Cell being something out a "a long-gone era" era a reason to grade it below Wrigley Field?

I think it's a good exchange not for any particular point Woody Paige made, rather for the fact that he had respect enough to respond to some excellent points.

ChiSoxGirl
07-03-2009, 11:02 PM
Boston is number 1? I'm shocked. Shocked I tell you.

I'm even more shocked that Wrigley was #3!

RadioheadRocks
07-03-2009, 11:12 PM
The print edition on The Sporting News just arrived and they rate the parks too.

U.S. Cellular is ranked 24th out of 30 ahead of Cincinnati, Toronto, Oakland, Miami (new stadium), Minnesota and Tampa Bay.

The one thing they love about the park is the scoreboard.

Boston is ranked #1, Pittsburgh #2, Wrigley Field #3, Baltimore #4, San Francisco #5.

Lip


:rolleyes: Are these folks basing their #24 ranking on the Cell as it was before all the renovations? If so, some of them need to pay the Cell a visit... they just might change their minds and rank it a little higher.

milrtyme28
07-03-2009, 11:17 PM
I can't possibly see how USCF gets ranked LAST. Some of the newer ballparks are inferior in my opinion. For example, Miller Park.

Miller is a marvel from an engineering standpoint but you don"t want to be there on a hot sunny day. The vast structure needed to support the roof eliminates any breeze. We were dying from the heat the last time the Sox visted Miller. If you are sitting in the outfield you cant see the warning track at all unless you are in the first few rows. The bathrooms are half the size they need to be. The concourses are so narrow that its impossible to move at all if the place is sold out. It can take two innings to get a beer or food because there aren't enough concession stands.

I actually do enjoy seeing games at Wrigley. Other than the fact that it is old and the multimedia is non-existant it is a great place to see a game if you arent sitting behind a pole. The upper deck there is really much closer to the action than the upper deck at USCF.

I still think that USCF is a great park tho. The food is good, the sightlines are awesome - there are only a few bad seats in the park. (The seats on either side of the batters eye in center field suck - you can only see one side of the outfield) Easy to get in, easy to get out, easy to pee, great sound system and displays - whats the problem? I thinkt the fantastic tailgate negates the area argument as well.

C-Dawg
07-04-2009, 11:25 AM
Miller is a marvel from an engineering standpoint but you don"t want to be there on a hot sunny day. The vast structure needed to support the roof eliminates any breeze. We were dying from the heat the last time the Sox visted Miller.

I have an unusual observation about Miller Park. The lighting inside it remkinds me of way back in 4th Grade in 1974 during the Arab oil embargo; to save energy costs the schools were leaving the lights off in class if it was a bright day outside. Bad, inadequate lighting came in from the windows and if you were facing someone who had the windows behind them, they were lost in the glare.

That's what I think of everytime I go inside Miller Park when the sun is shining. Weird, I know.

TomBradley72
07-04-2009, 01:28 PM
I don't understand the hate for Miller Park....I've been to about 20 games there....it's not perfect...especially the lighting during day games...but I'd put the quality/variety of the food ahead of the Cell, much better tailgate set up, and I think they did a pretty good job with the overall "feel" of the ballpark considering the challenges of doing that in a retractable roof set up. The mezzanine level seats especially provide an outstanding perspective of a game..kind of halfway between lower deck and upper deck.

In my opinion the White Sox are living off reputation when it comes to food at the Cell....I think it's become very mediocre overall and I can think of at least a dozen ballparks that I've been to that are now ahead of the Cell. As far as tailgating goes, there really is no "set up"...just parking lots...if they put in permanent restrooms and food facilities (like Miller Park)...it would be a major improvement.

Lip Man 1
07-04-2009, 04:22 PM
Radio:

Nope the picture they showed with it was from last year's ALCS.

The park got a reputation early on because of the ill conceived ideas coupled with the bad timing as a number of retro parks were being opened and despite the renovations they haven't been able to shake it.

It's unfortunate because I enjoyed being at it very much.

Lip

TDog
07-04-2009, 04:38 PM
I don't understand the hate for Miller Park....I've been to about 20 games there....it's not perfect...especially the lighting during day games...but I'd put the quality/variety of the food ahead of the Cell, much better tailgate set up, and I think they did a pretty good job with the overall "feel" of the ballpark considering the challenges of doing that in a retractable roof set up. The mezzanine level seats especially provide an outstanding perspective of a game..kind of halfway between lower deck and upper deck.

In my opinion the White Sox are living off reputation when it comes to food at the Cell....I think it's become very mediocre overall and I can think of at least a dozen ballparks that I've been to that are now ahead of the Cell. As far as tailgating goes, there really is no "set up"...just parking lots...if they put in permanent restrooms and food facilities (like Miller Park)...it would be a major improvement.

Rating a ballpark as superior because of its setup for tailgating is more ridiculous than giving a ballpark a superior rating because of the cool looking houses across the street.

I can't tell you what the tailgating is like at AT&T because I take the BART and the Muni to get to Giants games.

I didn't find the food in Milwaukee to be any better than the food at the Cell. In fact, early on many believe that the food at County Stadium was better than the food at Miller Park, although I'm sure many of the specific complaints have been addressed by now.

Red Barchetta
07-04-2009, 06:02 PM
The print edition on The Sporting News just arrived and they rate the parks too.

U.S. Cellular is ranked 24th out of 30 ahead of Cincinnati, Toronto, Oakland, Miami (new stadium), Minnesota and Tampa Bay.

The one thing they love about the park is the scoreboard.

Boston is ranked #1, Pittsburgh #2, Wrigley Field #3, Baltimore #4, San Francisco #5.

Lip

What I find hard to believe is that out of the 30 MLB teams, there are only 10 teams who play in ballparks older than the Cell (Boston, Tampa Bay, Toronto, Minnesota, KC, Anaheim, Oakland, Florida, Los Angeles and the Cubs).

The Twins and Marlins have new ballparks planned and the A's are trying to get a new ballpark. The Royals and Angels have had extensive ballpark renovations and the Dodgers are planning similar renovations. That leaves only the Red Sox and Cubs in their battle of the classic ballparks.

By ranking the Cell at #24, that only leaves Cincinnati (not sure what they mean by "new" Florida stadium) with a ballpark built after the Cell that is considered worse.

I like a lot of the new retro ballparks, however I can't believe all the other 18 ballparks built after the Cell are better.

Viva Medias B's
07-04-2009, 06:30 PM
How could The Sporting News, out of St. Louis, not rank the new Busch Stadium in the Top 5?

TDog
07-04-2009, 06:42 PM
How could The Sporting News, out of St. Louis, not rank the new Busch Stadium in the Top 5?

The Sporting New gave up being the Baseball Bible when the Spink family sold out to Times Mirror in the laste 1970s. I don't even know if they are technically a St. Louis publication anymore.

Lip Man 1
07-04-2009, 07:26 PM
Red:

They basically said that just the fact that Miami finally got a new stadium on the board and starting construction warrents an upgrade from 'the worst'.

Lip

sullythered
07-04-2009, 10:00 PM
I don't care where these fools "rank" my park. Sox park is my favorite place on this earth. That's all that matters to me.

And Woody Paige looks like a catfish.

tick53
07-05-2009, 08:11 AM
Woody Paige is an idiot anyway and Ozzie should just keep his mouth shut about Wrigley Field. It serves no purpose and I'm sick and tired of hearing about it. We all agree about Wrigley so why not move on to more important issues.

skobabe8
07-05-2009, 01:13 PM
Woody Paige is an idiot anyway and Ozzie should just keep his mouth shut about Wrigley Field. It serves no purpose and I'm sick and tired of hearing about it. We all agree about Wrigley so why not move on to more important issues.

I know where you are coming from, but reporters ask him about it every year. Its not like he's talking about Wrigley out of the blue.

The Critic
07-06-2009, 09:39 AM
I know where you are coming from, but reporters ask him about it every year. Its not like he's talking about Wrigley out of the blue.
That's true, but sometimes I do wish Ozzie had it in him to say "you know how I feel about Wrigley, we don't need to go over it again".
But that's not Ozzie, for better or worse. He answers the questions and provides the soundbites.

Alexei4president
07-06-2009, 10:27 PM
i really hate how ESPN hates the sox so much but to be honest i have become pretty numb to it but really the metrodome is better? and that dump the marlins play in? Really???